On Nov 14, 2:24 ¨Βν¬ Θυηθ ΣασσΌθ®®®ΐδνυ®αγ®υλΎ χςοτεΊ > On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Luis Lavena wrote: > > Right now we have 2 blockers for releasing the final -27 of One-Click: > > > - Rake fully compatible with Windows > > - Solve some installer issues. > > > The installer issues are reported in RubyForge as bugs, and should be > > easy to get fixed. > > > On the other hand, we are working with Rake developers to fix several > > issues introduced in latest releases that affected many Windows users. > > It might be worth adding a news item about this sort of thing to the > site. ¨Βθιχουμθεμπ πεοπμε σετθατ τθπςοκεγισ στιμαμιφε® > Also, may I suggest that you provide people with some > information about how you'd like them to test the candidate release? > Obviously the wider usage you get of a candidate the better, but a > "sketch" of which parts you really would like people to stress would > help: it could give an impression of which bits you consider > particularly stable as well, for those reluctant to install a > release candidate. > Guilty of charge. Basically the update boosted 1.8.6 to patchlevel 287, which included all the "security patches" that make nervous everybody a few months ago. It also included updated version of RubyGems, but at that time was 1.2.0, after that 1.3.0 was released and was broken on Windows, which I missed the release deadline and generated some issues for the few users upgraded. The last piece of the puzzle was Rake, which added some things that broke most of the shell calls. I'm working with the Rake developers and contributors to see these things and came up with something that works for One-Click, Jruby and others. > Are there plans for a 1.8.7 release, or are you just waiting for 1.9.1 > to come out, and skip 1.8.7? No plans for 1.8.7, even with 1.8.6-p287 had weird results for things like ParseTree, which is important for several projects that depend on. Plans for 1.9 are contemplated but not for the current One-Click codebase. Bundling everything makes difficult differentiate ruby from the packages that need to be tested for compatibility. You can check here the list of packages included in RC1: http://rubyforge.org/frs/shownotes.php?group_id=167&release_id=26150 Not to mention the ones not updated :-D > Is there any prospect of a 64-bit release (for those flavours of Vista > that support it)? Current One-Click is build based on binary releases available at garbagecollect page: http://www.garbagecollect.jp/ruby/mswin32/ There are no plans for 64bits for current installer, since it depends on this VC6 builds. The 64bits available builds are for 1.9, but those depends on VC8, something we are trying to avoid and move to MinGW (GCC) to reduce the discrepancies across platforms for the build process (not only of ruby but extensions and other projects). mingw-w64 will provide the building blocks, it can cross-compile from 32bits OS targeting 64bits My installed OS base is 32bits XP, with only one x64 XP edition available, and cannot book that resource for OpenSource projects at this time. > If I got some time to help I'd need to know about the tools used to > create this, buthttp://rubyinstaller.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?DevDoc > says it will be updated soon, and it last was in April. ¨Βςοοζ τθατ > the team is busy, certainly :-) ¨Βπδατιξτθατ χουμναλε ιτ εασιες > for people to help you, I think. To work on current installer, these docs are up to date. To work on the new installer, the docs are in the readme document at github: http://www.github.com/luislavena/rubyinstaller Bootstrapping only requires Ruby+Rake :-) With the new installer we found issues that make difficult build different versions of the same package (on which Ruby depends like readline, zlib, and others). Work on this new building process has made some progress the past days: http://gist.github.com/19707 Some progress about One-Click Installer can be found in my blog: http://blog.mmediasys.com/ Also the developer mailing list is a good resource: http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubyinstaller-devel > > Thank you, > Hugh Thanks to you Hugh for your interest and please apologize the lack of organization :-( We definitely need some help :-) Regards, -- Luis Lavena